United Kingdom against air attack. The scheme embraced the formation of 52 squadrons, together with the necessary ground defences to be provided by the Army.

The verdict of the election having been unmistakable, the Cabinet at its next meeting on November 4 decided to resign at once. The King thereupon sent for Mr. Baldwin, who had returned to London from the country the same afternoon. Thus after an interval of less than a year the country again found itself under a Conservative Government with a clear majority in both Houses of Parliament.

Just before its resignation the outgoing Ministry issued the report of the Cabinet Committee which, conformably to the announcement of the Prime Minister, had been set up on October 31, to inquire into the authenticity of the Zinovieff letter. The Committee consisted of Mr. MacDonald, Lord Haldane, Lord Parmoor, and Mr. Henderson. They stated that, after hearing the departments concerned, they found it impossible on the evidence before them to come to a positive conclusion on the subject. The original letter had not been produced to or seen by any Government department, and action had been taken on what was not claimed to be more than a copy. In the short time available the Committee had been unable to obtain further light on the matter.

66

This inconclusive statement was the whole fruit of Mr. MacDonald's promised efforts to probe to the roots" the matter of the Zinovieff letter. It could be variously interpreted as either exonerating or censuring the Foreign Office officials, and it left the public uncertain how far Mr. MacDonald identified himself with them. Nor was it calculated to heal the breach in Anglo-Russian relations which had been caused by the Foreign Office Note. Thus those who had expected that the Labour Government would bring about a real friendship between Britain and Russia were disappointed. In the matter of Russia, as in that of reparations, Mr. MacDonald had been in action-whatever he may have been in speech-the exponent rather of the Liberal than of the Labour policy, but a more fearless and conscientious exponent than any Liberal leader would have been likely to prove himself. In internal affairs also the Labour Ministry had done little more than keep the country going on the lines of the King's Speech introduced by Mr. Baldwin-a remarkable document which in a way portended as great a revolution in British politics as the advent of Labour to office. But Mr. MacDonald took in earnest what with the Conservatives was suspected of being mere window-dressing, and in his whole-hearted devotion to the cause of social reform set a standard which succeeding Governments, of whatever party, would not be able to ignore.

Among Mr. MacDonald's colleagues, two, Mr. Snowden and Mr. Thomas, left office with enhanced reputations. Mr. Snowden as Chancellor of the Exchequer had won the respect

and confidence of financial circles, and Mr. Thomas at the Colonial Office had shown great breadth of view, and in particular by his tact and good sense had contributed not a little to the successful settlement of the thorny question of the Irish Boundary Commission. The Labour administration had throughout maintained excellent relations with the Civil Service, and with the Court, and in these respects had refuted Mr. Churchill's charge that Labour was "unfit to govern." Closer contact with Monarchy had served to modify Labour prejudices against the institution, and it was remarked that at the election the Labour members who had held posts in the King's household were returned to Parliament with increased majorities.

CHAPTER V.

THE NEW GOVERNMENT.

WITHIN two days of receiving the King's summons, Mr. Baldwin had made a sufficient number of appointments to form a practically complete Cabinet. He gave important posts to three prominent members of the old Coalition Government, Mr. Austen Chamberlain becoming Foreign Secretary, Lord Birkenhead Secretary for India, and Mr. Winston Churchill, Chancellor of the Exchequer. The last-named appointment gave offence in certain Conservative quarters, as did also the omission from the Ministry of Sir Robert Horne. The Exchequer had been offered in the first instance to Mr. Neville Chamberlain, but he had preferred to go back to his earlier office of Minister of Health. As finally constituted, the Cabinet contained six members of the House of Lords. A new departure was made. by leaving the Postmaster-General out of the Cabinet, and giving the post to a Minister who was less a politican than a business man.

On November 1 the British Empire Exhibition at Wembley was formally closed by its President, the Prince of Wales. Addressing an audience of several thousands which had gathered at the Stadium in spite of most inclement weather, he said that the hope expressed by the King in opening the Exhibition, that it would bring the peoples of the Empire to a better knowledge of how to meet their reciprocal wants and obligations, had been well fulfilled. The people of the home country had learnt from it the resources and possibilities of the Empire, and the people from overseas had gained not only a better knowledge of the manufacturing resources of this country, but also a more sympathetic understanding of the problems which faced the Empire in the social organisation, the development, and the defence of its lands. The fellowship established in connexion

with the Exhibition had done much to help its work of interImperial education, and to provide that its lesson should not be forgotten.

Some time before the closing of the Exhibition a strong movement was set on foot for its re-opening in 1925. On the Dominions being approached, the Governments of New Zealand, South Africa, and India declined for various reasons to participate. Nevertheless the idea was persevered with, and was viewed with favour by the new Government. Mr. Baldwin in his Guildhall speech stated that the Government did not intend to allow this great enterprise to come to an untimely end if it could possibly help, and on November 17 Mr. Amery, the new Secretary for the Colonies, announced that the Government looked forward confidently to the renewed assistance of those who had carried the Exhibition so far, and were prepared on their part to do substantially more than they had done in the past, and to cooperate more actively in the way of easing in some measure the burdens which others had borne. On November 24 it was definitely decided by the Executive Council of the Exhibition to continue it during 1925.

The invitations to the Lord Mayor's Guildhall banquet on November 10 had been sent to the outgoing Cabinet, but Mr. Baldwin became Premier just in time to be the guest of the evening. Although he had not yet consulted with his Cabinet, his speech gave several indications of the policy he intended to pursue. Referring first to the election which had just taken place, he said that neither he nor any one of his colleagues was under any misapprehension as to its significance. "We know that it is the testimony of our fellow-countrymen in favour of ordered progress and not of stagnation; we know that it is a decisive vote against minority government; and we know that we have received support from many of those who at ordinary times might have given their support to other parties. But they have endeavoured to put into power a rational Government, and it is in the exercise of that trust that we shall endeavour to deserve their confidence." In foreign policy they stood by the Peace treaties, and would cultivate good relations with foreign countries on the basis of those treaties. At the same time they fully accepted and welcomed the results of the London Conference, and trusted that the admission of Germany to the League of Nations in a manner consonant with her own dignity and with the obligations of the Covenant would not be long delayed. Mr. Baldwin paid a tribute to the inestimable value of the League of Nations as a clearing office for international disputes as illustrated recently in the case of Mosul. On the questions of Egypt and Russia he judged it premature to make a statement. The authority of the Viceroy would be supported in India, and certain questions affecting the Dominions, such as preference and defence, would have to be reviewed. In domestic matters he cautioned the people against expecting too

much from the Government; the redemption of the people must come from themselves, and happy would they be if they could show them the way, and help them to help themselves.

A few days before the Guildhall banquet-on November 6— Mr. MacDonald had been entertained at a dinner by the Executive of the Labour Party in conjunction with the General Council of the Trades Union Congress. Mr. Henderson, who presided, said that the dinner had been organised in the shortest possible time, one of the reasons for their gathering being that within a few hours of the declaration of the poll a certain section of the Press had begun to play a "stunt" with regard to their parliamentary leader similar to the "Balfour must go" stunt of some years before. He believed, however, that the spirit and unity of their gathering represented the spirit and unity of the entire movement so far as that particular matter was concerned. Mr. Clynes, after paying a tribute to Mr. MacDonald's work on behalf of the Labour Party both in and out of office, said that he had no rival for the leadership of the party, and there could be no question of supplanting him; his colleagues knew better. than to give his job to any other man. Mr. MacDonald in replying said that, according to the Press, he had been responsible for bringing them into some difficulties, but they were showing that night that they did not take quite the same view, and that even if they did, their generosity was equal to all the tests that might be put upon it.

The Labour Party, in truth, was not dissatisfied with the result of the election. It had increased its poll considerably, and looked forward with confidence to obtaining a clear majority at the next election in a few years' time. The Liberal Party, on the other hand, could see in the election nothing but a disaster threatening its very existence. Its future was discussed by Mr. Asquith at a luncheon given in his honour at the Reform Club on November 10. The veteran leader, while recognising the gravity of the situation, was yet able to give his party a message of encouragement and hope. He compared the present defeat of the party to that which they experienced in 1895, when, as now, the political quidnuncs saw in them "all the symptoms of a political invalid in a state of hopeless decline." He said now, as he had said then, that the Liberal Party would continue the fight, and there was no reason for any man among them to fail in heart or hope. He admitted that the growth of the Labour Party in the last ten years was a phenomenon of portentous significance, but he denied that the function of an independent Liberal Party was not therefore as necessary as ever. He repudiated the suggestion that the Liberal Party should. drift into and be ultimately absorbed by the other two political combinations. He maintained that Liberalism had distinctive principles and ideals-otherwise it would be nothing but an "organised hypocrisy "-and that it would be fatal for the future of the country if their politics degenerated into what

might be represented as a perpetual duel between Conservatism on the one side and Socialism on the other. He impressed on his hearers the necessity of using propaganda as an instrument for winning the electorate, holding up as an example the activities of the Labour Party in this field. He also laid stress on the need of democratising the party machinery, and stated that an expert Committee had been appointed to go into this question.

The next day a meeting of about one hundred defeated Liberal candidates was held at the National Liberal Club under the presidency of Mr. Pringle. It was decided to continue the existence of the party, and to place the views of defeated candidates before the Committee mentioned by Mr. Asquith. Strong dissatisfaction was expressed at the failure of Mr. Lloyd George to place at the disposal of the party a sufficiently large sum from the fund still left over from the Coalition and National Liberal war chest. Within the next few days certain members of the party expressed their determination not to recognise Mr. George as their leader in the new Parliament. In spite, however, of these signs of disunion, the Executive Committee of the National Liberal Federation decided soon after (November 20) to convene a national conference in January, to run not less than five hundred candidates at the next election, and to raise a fighting fund of 500,0001.

The first step taken by the new Cabinet was to appoint a Committee under the presidency of Mr. A. Chamberlain to inquire into the authenticity of the Zinovieff letter, which the late Government had left an open question. As the result of its inquiries, Mr. Chamberlain on November 21 sent a letter to M. Rakovsky, stating that the information in possession of the Government left no doubt in their mind of the authenticity of the letter. The Note further went on to say that the activities of which the Government complained were not confined to one particular letter, but extended to a whole body of revolutionary propaganda of which the letter was a fair specimen, and which was sometimes conducted in secret and sometimes not concealed. The Note concluded with an admonition to the Soviet Government to ponder well the observations in Mr. MacDonald's Note of October 24, about its relations with the Third International and their effect upon its arrangements with England.

This letter was accompanied by two others from the Foreign Office. One contained a curt intimation from Mr. Chamberlain that the Government found themselves unable to recommend the Treaties with the U.S.S.R. signed by their predecessors on August 8 to the consideration of Parliament, or to submit them. to the King for ratification. The other, signed by Mr. Gregory, dealt with the Note sent by M. Rakovsky to Mr. MacDonald on October 27, denouncing the Zinovieff letter as a forgery and demanding an apology and the punishment of those involved in the forgery. This Note had appeared in the Press in London